Skip to main content

About your Search

20130615
20130623
Search Results 0 to 21 of about 22 (some duplicates have been removed)
called the cost of any quality three decades of the super rich and the economy. are we living in a time of economic inequality and is that important? >> guest: we are indeed the gap between the rich and the poor stands at the mere historical levels, not just in the united kingdom but even more so in the united states and across the majority of the rich world. these countries have been getting much more unequaled since the 1970's and in some countries particularly the united kingdom and the united states now back to the kind of income the gaps that we saw in the pre-war iraq. i mean in the united kingdom, we are back to the sort of levels of any quality of the 1930's and in the united states we are back to inequality of the 1920's. so this is a remarkable switch. we have a long period of equalization. the great leveling as historians have to find it in the post war era to the 1970's and then that whole process has gone into reverse. we have simply gone backwards to where we were eda, 90 years ago. >> host: some would call that leveling the redistribution. >> guest: some of it was a redis
: they just thought by designing the system, by putting the -- under a collective economy they could bring great results. [speaking mandarin chinese] >> translator: they are stripped everybody's freedom. [speaking mandarin chinese] >> translator: nobody has a freedom to find food . >> to grow food. >> translator: to grow them and find food according to their own effort. >> so they collectivized -- they collectivized farming. [speaking mandarin chinese] >> took away the incentive to grow -- [speaking mandarin chinese] >> translator: dismantled individuals and individual house hold as production units. >> there was grain in the agricultural areas, but it got sent away; correct? [speaking mandarin chinese] >> translator: the grain production is -- [inaudible] the grain production was rejuiced by huge -- reduced by a huge amount. they took away the incentive, as you said of production. >> they also took it away. the grain itself? correct? they took it to the city. [speaking mandarin chinese] >> translator: so the government simply took away the harvest, the yields of all of it. [speaking manda
the financial system and the economy did it exist to support. this is at the center of "masters of nothing," the book we're launching this week. because throughout her life, lady bacher passionately believe capitalism was not only the effect this form of economic organization ever invented, but also the most moral. today, the first of those points is almost undisputed and we should all be grateful to the market liberals of west and east, who in free the peoples of the former communist bloc restocked in turkey so liberated billions in china and india and indonesia in beyond, from grinding poverty and prove once and for all that free markets are the greatest source of prosperity ever known to man. but the free market is a world force of good is less well understood and its moral authority hinges on two crucial factors. first, free-market airfare because we were disproportionate to effort. when markets work, those who prosper and work hard and risk their capital to succeed in making other people's lives, their customers lives better. for most people, fairness is a form of reciprocity that she
, professional sports. die-hard the know where to begin, a vast amount of the economy is based on taste and subjective values. there is no reason why there couldn't be a society in which we do get paid for social media, the other people do. what is the point of that? and here is where there is a leap of faith required. capitalism can work. markets can work. markets work when they start helping people coordinate to create more wealth and more positive effect for each other than they would have otherwise and when you have a market that grows as a result more people are better in the trading system that sharing system. that happened again and again and it is the real effect and is entirely appropriate especially for information network. so yes, you would be paying but you will also get paid. the nature of getting paid would be unlike any payment anyone has experienced before. we are used to the idea that you pay for stuff more often than you get paid. you only get paid every two weeks for your salary or whatever royalty check and always buying your coffee and spending in little drips and d
and singapore. so we were number one anymore, blue number three against pretty dynamic economies. over the last 13 years, with now dropped down to number 18. when people ask what is wrong with the economy, why do we have such high unemployment? y has disposable income per capita basis, why is that decline in house over the last 10 years? the answer is right there. we are less free today than we were 13 years ago. as are economic freedom declines, government regulation increase, taxes increased, the engine that is the basis for our prosperity, which is business is lessened and prosperity is therefore declining as well. as economic freedom does not come so does prosperity. so if the business people are willing to speak up for free enterprise capitalism, we can expect economic freedom to continue to lesson in american press verity will continue to lesson as well. we are far from a free enterprise capitalist system anymore. we are moved towards a crony capitalistic system, where we've got a government and big business often times colluding with each other. the great example is the fiscal cliff bill
, the economies were booming and it was during the depression. of course one of the reasons we were doing that is because they were back to the war. and he became very impressed with hitler and mao sweeney and he began going back home and talking up hitler and rossellini and eventually, that led to his downfall. among the southern states and southern democrats, there was very little isolation. it was mainly among midwestern republicans. but in some other areas, there was very strong support for it. eventually they forced the democratic party to have him retire. they could not put up with his pro-not see views. people can say what they want. he was a world war i hero. he was a very bright guy. he sort of had to be in this period. he is remembered today mainly through watergate and being a conservative democrat, to lead the investigation, it was part of this. and he also stood up to the individual that was leading the witchhunt. he spent most of his life as a judge. everyone was afraid of him. saying that if he defended this, you you said that he was working to the economist or he was tied
and in the 18 eighties the economic growth rate was constantly 8% per year and already the largest economy in the world. it was not like china in our time had gross from a very low base it was the world's greatest economy when that decade began and it still grew. at an astounding rate with huge increases in productivity accompanied by pioneering events in almost every industry steel, so in those periods at times setting up the country to get through to the point* where the states could abolish slavery to ensure the integrity of the country to deal with the economic pressure to focus the pressure not on the are rich or mythical categories roosevelt conjured for his own purposes of malefactors of great wealth anwr profiteers. there were none. that is nonsense and 1933 but of the rockefellers have the boards would pay for this they would burn their houses down but their real enemies name was a japanese imperialists and then the containment strategy was devised very imaginatively and it worked there were some mistakes but it worked and it worked completely and not to make light of those who di
's kind of a useful idea, we've got to separate economies and one of them everything gets better and cheaper and better and cheaper in the other one they don't. we've got three important sectors of the economy is largely dominated politics. education, which is almost entirely a local monopolies, 91%, 92% go to public schools. health care, which even before the aca was 50% government spending, have socialized system before we got around to making it worse three-quarter socialist system. and then you've got pensions, which is dominated by social security of course. medicare is a piece of that mark bradley. you've got a system in which people are paying 12.5% of their income for their entire lives and campaign some renown of it that is not at all related to but they put into it. one of the diverse to baser with the idea social security with an investment. this country is full of people who believe there is a found somewhere to which social security taxes go and it's supposed to be there waiting for them. one of the great frauds ever perpetrated on the american people you try to expl
. it is great, the printing machine, when the economy of it works, the best place for print on demand machine is as close to the customer as it can possibly be. theoretically speaking the best place for print on demand machine is in every retail store. that is in a pure theory because then you have no cost of shipping, no time of shipping call all that. we have a really long way to go on technology before that is of interest and we again, behind closed doors when we look at that decision, we actually worry about it. to facilitate a print on demand machine and it gets robust enough, on the corner, that machine, so is everybody else, and if that is actually healthy for our retail environment, you know, it is healthy -- we need to have bookstores. we need to have places where they are about books and have the machine in the quarter that will actually facilitate that. we have that as the concern, something we should -- one of many decisions, we should facilitate this, do as much as possible, some retail bookstores really want it, some independent bookstores really want the machine, should we faci
on cooperatives and the al terntive economy. there's no better magazine in the country than "yes" magazine to tell you there's a burgeoning alternative economy expanding in the united states locally controlled, not just co-ops, but community banks instead of city banks, credit unions instead of bank of america, farmer to consumer markets are 8,000 and growing all over the country, renewable energy locally, and many other local efforts that speak the strategy of displacement of large multinational corporations by getting their customers to move into the community economics world, and just a couple more, and then we can have a good discussion. i have columns on very enlightened ceos, and my favorite is the late ray anderson of interface corporation who decided in 1994 for the company's biggest carpet tile manufacturer in the world out of atlanta, georgia. i heard a lecture on industrial ecology by paul hopkins, and he was a man changed calling himself a recovering plundering of the planet. [laughter] and he swore he was going to turn his entire company around so that within 20 years or so, it would
, the economies were booming and the united states was still in the great depression. of course, withdrawn of the reasons they were doing that is because they were rearming, they were about to go to war, and he became very, very impressed with hitler and mussilini which led to the down fall because among the southern states and southern democrats there was little isolationist sentiments. that sentiments in the country was among midwestern republicans, but among southern democrats, they were anglophiles. there was strong support for england, and event ily, the democratic party forced him to retire because they put up a lot of his shenanigans, but could not put up with the pro-nazi sentiments. people can say what they want in sam. sam was a world war i hero. he was very bright guy. he was conservative in a lot of ways issue and he was one of the staunch defenders of segregation, which he sort of had to be if you were a southern senator of the period. he was a leading strategist. that's not how he's remembered today. he's remembered today through watergate because he led the hearings, and tha
food and farming economy. >> the book is "financing our foodshed: growing local food with slow money". the slow money was the brainchild of a man who had the idea that you could take the concept of money, a venture-capital, investments, loans, and instead of sending it off to wall street you could invested writing your local community. in particular in food. so the idea is if we slow food down you get more quality, thoughtfulness, and it is just better all-around. if you slow money down you get the same result. more thoughtful attention to where your money goes, is it doing good, harm. in particular what if you try to invest it right in your own local community? sustainable farming, businesses that support local food, the support soil fertility, what if we did that? what difference would that make it? we think it would make a huge difference. several years ago i got more interested in a local food movement ended up one of the big obstacles for small farmers was capital to buy a farm, but even just small amounts of capital for a piece of equipment. thirty years ago when my husband and
a decent chance to have a green economy. for that, we need money. we can get involved in a the way that we did in afghanistan and iraq. so the drones give us the ability to get involved without doubt level of cost if you look at how it was done come it is extremely disturbing. that is the administration who went into the conflict in libya without letting congress discuss it. that is because the administration said there is no american lives at risk and this is not a war. so congress doesn't really have a say about this. so it set a precedent for the next administration to get us involved in conflicts without going to congress. i think that it is dangerously seductive with former officials of the obama administration. it seems so effortless but lives at risk. he's just getting involved in somalia and bases now being peppered around the middle east and in africa as well as well as the pacific rim. why are john bases being set up because they must be planned in the future as well. there is something to conserve the proliferation of jones. that is something that she has known about. >> talk a
no luxury accommodation versus sort of just what we see as economy today. there were cost overruns and was never completed, however, the german red cross was set up there to help the survivors initially. they were essentially processed and sent on their way. helga's story takes another turn in the remarkable in that she finally gets on the train to start heading towards the west. the idea was that these refugees wanted to end up in allied hands. they were hoping to make to the british or the american lines. she was on a train during the dresden firebombing, but she does eventually make it to california where she finally arrived in about 1948. and here is an actual official boarding pass for the gustloff. most people aboard the gustloff of course didn't have any official documentation. those were handed out in a very first days of the boarding when it was still somewhat orderly, and that would've been around again the 27th and 28th of january, 1945. after that the situation just comes out of control and people are just pushing their way onto the ship. so because of that most people
before the economies collapse had a larger intelligence system but then they fell on hard times after the collapse of communism. they are on their way back but they are still a shadow of their former self. does that answer the question? >> i don't mean to be disrespectful by asking this but nevertheless what does your book do different from the multivolume of dr. johnson in his years in executive summary of his? i don't mean to sound disrespectful. it's been a common note disrespect taken. actually, i am almost tempted to drag, pierre and let him give his side of the story but what i tried to do -- tom's multivolume history is wonderful except that there is still huge chunks of it they remain classified. a i tried to fill in some of the blanks and in some cases with some success, and others not. i tried to add material that was not contained in tom's multivolume history because with all due respect to my friend back there, there were many other things written on specific operations and specific aspects of the agency and i tried to bring them all together plus bring in -- there was als
to how you raise yourself out of poverty. this has to be an asset, women's rights and the economy and the world at play and the future of afghanistan is crucial and non negotiable. [applause] >> you can see for all of us, for me personally and for everyone in this glorious place this has been a very special special time, to hear your thoughts about how you create these wonderful works of fiction and this i think is the best of all. for those who have not had the chance to echo these extraordinary, compelling, morality play over generations, set in this place and in california and universal to all of us. >> guest: i have learned so much from you and i am a great admirer of yours, you are terrific at what you do. if they told me you were doing this interview i was really floored. >> thank you. [applause] >> we like to hear from you. tweet as your feedback, twitter.com/booktv. >> are you interested in being a part of booktv's online book club? cheryl sandberg's book lean in, women work and the will to lead. miss sandberg who is the c o 0 of facebook discusses why is difficult for wom
and cheaper. and the other one they don't. we have three important sector of the economy that are largely dominated by politics. there's a education, which is almost entirely the local monopoly 91% of students go to public schools, you have health care, which even before the aca was 50% government spending. it was a half socialized system before we got around to making it a worst three quarter socialized system. then you have pensions. which is dominated by social security, of course, medicare is sort of a piece of that. if you look at retirement overall. and you have a system in which people are paying 12.5% of the income for the entire lives and getting something out of it that is not all related to what they put in to it. one of the worst debate we lost is the idea of social security is an investment. this country is full of people who believe there is a fund somewhere in to which their social security taxes go. and it's supposed to be the there waiting for them. and one of the great frauds ever perpetrated on the american people -- you try to explain to them that the social security t
in the rest of the economy and translate it into things that are important in policy in washington. and in this century, that's going to be an even more important part of assuring we have good governance in this country, because the volumes of information we're dealing with are horrendous, and people who have a practiced approach at being able to take those volumes of information and translate them into something meaningful in policy will be more important, not less important in the future. so that's the reason why what beth has done here is so important. it helps people understand in an academic sense what it is we do as opposed to the caricature of lobbyists that often dominates the possible discussion, and we have to preserve the in this town the ability of the people who are the policy advocates to be able to present rational points of view, own though they come from different sigh. the agenda of the aclu would not be things i would necessarily agree with on the political front. but it is that clash, then, of ideas that allows to us really legislate. and it's such an important
earlier, the submarine. very important for the cash flow, the real economy of north korea, and it is important to point out that north korea's nuclear weapons station program was kim jong-il stream. believe me. the north koreans see it that way. it is part of the dynastic process in north korea that this dream by the great leader has now been carried on through the cheerleader and by the young kid if that makes sense to you. so, i actually where wrote a chapter as i talked about in my book where i lay out what the capabilities are the bridges right up today of february of this year, and then i talked about what they could do with the capabilities. then i talk about the kinds of countermeasures a weekend taken talk about recent initiatives of the are okay u.s. alliance. hopefully you will enjoy reading the chapter. there is more that kim jong-il did to set this up for survival. this was probably the most enjoyable chapter for me to write. i really enjoyed writing this chapter. that is, they have proliferation to state and not state actors. please allow me to point out that
to common law and that celebrated tradition and traditional economy. in the place of judicial discretion james davis the subcommittee chairman from georgia proposed in 1953 that mandatory minimum sentences be attached to a series of offenses that would require a presiding judge to give a predetermined sentence no matter what the judge happened to think. davis drew heavily on his views of the district to justify the move. we have reached the point where it's risky for women and girls to be on the streets after dusk congressman davis concluded at a time when d.c.'s crime rate was one of the lowest of any major city in the country. despite the crime panic some congressman voiced reservations and urged caution. pennsylvania democrat herman eberhard or the most outspoken critic of the bill pointed out congress is proposing something to the residence of the district of columbia that is not required in any state of the union adding we are attempting in fact to use the district of columbia as a guinea pig on which to tryout a radical departure of rentals but his colleagues were undeterred by the
we are modeling the american economy on europe and it is a failed model. doesn't work. there is no way you can have the deficits we have had and have the debt we are incurring without sending out a signal to the world that this country is not going to be what it was in the past. there is no way you can do that. if you are not going to act responsibly people take that message and they see it and then you turn around and when i went to washington eisenhower was president. i came out of the navy and served during kennedy, johnson and congress, we were spending 10% of gross domestic product on defense. today we are spending less than 4%. our allies in europe are spending less than 2%. the signal that goes out before the sequestration is we cut $493 out of the pentagon defense budget and we are about to cut another half a trillion which brings it close to $950 billion out of the ten year budget. the signal to the world is the united states is not going to be in position to contribute to a more peaceful and stable world in the decade ahead. >> you can watch this and other pr
Search Results 0 to 21 of about 22 (some duplicates have been removed)